Karnataka High Court
Sarojini W/O Honnappa Chalawadi vs The Gram Panchayat Budihal (Sk) on 6 March, 2018
Author: Ravi Malimath
Bench: Ravi Malimath
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
DHARWAD BENCH
ON THE 6TH DAY OF MARCH 2018
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAVI MALIMATH
WRIT PETITION NO.101199 OF 2018
AND
WRIT PETITION NOS.101406-101416 OF 2018 (LB-RES)
BETWEEN:
1. SAROJINI W/O HONNAPPA CHALAWADI,
AGE:36 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT: BAGALKOT
2. SHASHIKALA SANGAPPA BEGAR
AGE:26 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT: BAGALKOT
3. IRAVVA YALLAPPA CHALAWADI
AGE:47 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
4. GEETA TOTAPPA CHALAWADI,
D/O HANUMAPPA BEGAR,
AGE:25 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
5. BASAVVA AYYAPPA WALIKARA,
AGE:50 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
2
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
6. PREMA BEGAR W/O HANAMAPPA TARIWAL
AGE:23 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
7. PARAVVA BEGAR W/O SHIVAPUTRAPPA
AGE:64 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
8. PARVATI W/O SHANKRAPPA BEGAR
AGE:28 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
9. RENUKA BEGAR W/O NAGAPPA
AGE:39 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
10. PRABHU HANUMAPPA BEGAR
AGE:25 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
11. HANUMAPPA MALLESHAPPA BEGAR
AGE:30 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
12. SUMITRA W/O TIRUPATI DASAR
AGE:32 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT. ... PETITIONERS
(BY SRI J.S.SHETTY, ADVOCATE)
3
AND
1. THE GRAM PANCHAYAT BUDIHAL (SK)
HUNGUND TALUK BALGALKOT
REPRESENTED BY ITS
PANCHAYAT DEVELOPMENT OFFICER
2. THE PRESIDENT
GRAM PANCHAYAT BUDIHAL (SK)
HUNGUND TALUK DISTRICT BAGALKOT
3. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER
TALUKA PANCHAYAT HUNGUND,
HUNUGUND, DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
4. THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
ZILLA PANCHAYAT BAGALKOT,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER
BAGALKOT, DISTRICT BAGALKOT
6. SANGAMMA W/O SHANKARGOUDA PATIL
AGE:55 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
7. BHIMAVVA B WALIKAR
AGE:30 YEARS, OCC:COOLIE
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
8. MALLAVVA W/O BHIMAPPA MADIWALAR
AGE:50 YEARS, OCC:COOLIE
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
4
9. SUSALAVVA W/O KALAPPA KAMBAR
AGE:60 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT
10. KALAVVA W/O GADDEPPA KAMBAR
AGE:50 YEARS, OCC:HOUSEHOLD WORK,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
11. GEETA W/O VIRUPAXAPPA BADIGER
AGE:35 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
12. BASAMMA,
W/O HANAMAGOUDA NADUVINAMANI
AGE:55 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
13. NINGABASAVVA
W/O GULANAGOUDA YARANAKERI
AGE:50 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
14. SUMANGALA W/O AMARESHGOUDA PATIL
AGE:50 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
15. AMARAVVA W/O NAGAPPA YARANAKERI
AGE:50 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
5
16. BASAMMA W/O KALAKAPPA CHITTARAGI
AGE:55 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
17. ANNAPURNA
W/O SANGANAGOUDA TOMBAGI
AGE:48 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
18. LALABI HATELSAB WALIKAR
AGE:30 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
19. SEDANBEGUM W/O RAJESAB WALIKAR
AGE:29 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
20. HANAMAVVA W/O IRAPPA MADIVALAR
AGE:28 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
21. REKHA W/O SANGANAGOUDA GOUDAR
AGE: YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
22. SHARANAMMA W/O PRAKASH NADUVINAMANI
AGE: 28 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
23. NAGAMMA ISHWARAPPA PATANASHETTY
AGE: 35 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
6
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
24. SAVITRI W/O BHIMANAGOUDA GOUDAR
AGE:48 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
25. MAHADEVI W/O BASAVRAJ NASHI
AGE:45 YEARS, OCC:COOLI,
R/O:TARIWAL, TALUK:HUNGUND,
DISTRICT:BAGALKOT.
... RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI RAVI V.HOSAMANI, AGA FOR R-5)
THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER
ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
PRAYING TO QUASH THE RESOLUTION NO.4 PASSED BY
THE FIRST RESPONDENT GRAMA PANCHAYAT, BODDIHAL
SK DATED 21.01.2014, THE COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN
PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-"A"
AND ALSO THE HAKKUPATRA ISSUED BY THE THIRD
RESPONDENT THE OFFICER TALUKA PANCHAYAT
HUNGUND IN FAVOUR OF THE RESPONDENT NO.6 TO 25
THE COPY OF WHICH HAS BEEN PRODUCED HEREWITH
AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-B, B1 TO B19 AND DIRECT
THE RESPONDENT NO.1 AND 2 TO CONSIDER THE
OBJECTIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONERS AND CERTAIN
OTHER VILLAGERS, THE COPY OF THE WHICH HAS BEEN
PRODUCED HEREWITH AND MARKED AS ANNEXURE-C, C1
TO C5 AND ALLOT THE SITES IN FAVOUR OF THE
PETITIONERS BY FOLLOWING RESERVATION POLICY OF
THE GOVERNMENT BY RESERVING THE SITES IN FAVOUR
OF THE SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULED TRIBE
PEOPLE.
*****
7
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR
PRELIMINARY HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE
FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The case of the petitioners is that they, except petitioner No.5 who belongs to the Schedule Tribe, all belong to the Scheduled Caste. That they are entitled for allotment of sites under Ashraya Scheme. However, the 1st respondent has passed a resolution stating that since there are no persons belonging to Scheduled Caste/Schedule Tribe in the village, it would be allotted to other persons. The same is challenged herein.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioners, by relying on the Aadhaar Card and other materials produced as Annexure-D series, contends that the petitioners are all residents of the same village, therefore, the resolution is incorrect.
8
3. Learned Additional Government Advocate, who accepts notice for respondent No.5, contends that the State has created a Grievance Redressal Authority which would consider the very grievance of the writ petitioners herein. Therefore, on approaching the said authority, necessary relief may be granted to the petitioners.
4. In view of the availability of an alternative and efficacious remedy, it would not be appropriate to entertain these petitions. Consequently, the petitions are disposed off with a liberty to the petitioners to approach the Grievance Redressal Authority, if necessary.
Learned Additional Government Advocate is permitted to file memo of appearance in four weeks.
Sd/-
JUDGE Kms